Dunn to the White Sox (p. 12)

[dew1679666265]

Part of my issue with holding out for Gonzalez (aside from the idea that I don't think they're likely to be able to get him) is the salary difference and the fact that I think the Cubs can be competitive next season. If you're talking about an $8 million difference in salary between Dunn and Gonzalez, that's a lot of cheese that can help toward acquiring a front-line starter ala Cliff Lee. Add Dunn and Lee to this team (with a few other minor moves) and I think they have a good chance to be very much in the race next year.

 

If the goal is to compete next year, then Dunn is the better option. My point of view is that we simply have too many questions and not enough options in free agency this offseason to compete next year. In signing Lee and Dunn, we're investing $12-15 mil a year in Dunn and probably $20+ mil a year in Lee while we still have major question marks at third, right, left and the bullpen.

 

I'm more in favor of filling holes with stopgaps in the offseason and seeing what we've got in Castro for another year, Cashner (hopefully as a starter), J Jackson and Colvin for another year and perhaps even Brett Jackson without feeling like we have to shuttle them back and forth. We'll then have a better idea of what we need at the 2011 deadline and the 2012 offseason and, maybe, can fill holes more efficiently.

 

Also, if we pass on Dunn this year and miss on Gonzalez in 2012 (or if he doesn't become available), Nick Swisher may be available that year as well. He has a $10.25 mil team option, but it's unlikely to be picked up if the Yankees make a play for Gonzalez or Fielder that offseason. Swisher has a similar WAR to Dunn this year, had a much higher WAR last year, is younger and probably cheaper than Dunn. I'd argue Swisher could be a better option than Dunn at this point as well.

[dew1679666265]

That is your assumption. Your are also going to spend more and for longer term, and presumably be further removed from the recession, with more teams able to spend more money. Ideally I'd take Gonzalez, I just don't see any logic in passing on a guy who fits a need now and has every indication in being ready to sign with the Cubs to wait for a guy who may never even become a free agent a year later and with no indication that the Cubs are high on his list.

 

What's my assumption?

 

The logic in passing on Dunn is that I'm hesitant to give a four year, big money contract to a guy who will be 32 before we likely will be competitive again. I was a huge Dunn supporter 2 years ago when we signed Milton Bradley, but I don't know that potentially overpaying for Dunn now would make a lot of sense when there very possibly could be better options available a year later, when we'll actually (from my point of view) be competitive again.

[Abe Frohman]

If the Cubs can sign Dunn to a reasonable contract that leaves plenty of financial room to further better the team, then I think everyone would be happy.

 

As it stands, 1st base should be a high priority - and a key one. Waiting out and losing a bidding war for Gonzalez would not be good. I can see Prince Fielder going to an AL team, and I can also see some of the premier 1st basemen dragging it out.

 

If Dunn wants to be a Cub and can be signed for a nice deal, I'm happy. If the Cubs sign him to a 4 year deal for 50+ million per year and Hendry says that he signed him for a fair value - I think it's another idiotic contract.

 

I think we would all be much happier with Adrian Gonzalez because he is a better offensive and defensive baseball player. Defense does matter, and 1st base IS an important defensive position.

[jersey cubs fan]

That is your assumption. Your are also going to spend more and for longer term, and presumably be further removed from the recession, with more teams able to spend more money. Ideally I'd take Gonzalez, I just don't see any logic in passing on a guy who fits a need now and has every indication in being ready to sign with the Cubs to wait for a guy who may never even become a free agent a year later and with no indication that the Cubs are high on his list.

 

What's my assumption?

 

The logic in passing on Dunn is that I'm hesitant to give a four year, big money contract to a guy who will be 32 before we likely will be competitive again. I was a huge Dunn supporter 2 years ago when we signed Milton Bradley, but I don't know that potentially overpaying for Dunn now would make a lot of sense when there very possibly could be better options available a year later, when we'll actually (from my point of view) be competitive again.

 

The assumption that you would get more years or production from Gonzalez.

 

I understand your reasoning, I just don't see the logic. You try and field the best team you can on April 1 every year, unless you are Pittsburgh. You don't hold back in hopes of maybe having a chance at somebody else a year later. This team is struggling to put butts in seats this year. They will be hit hard if they don't make a splash this offseason. And if they are also rans in 2011 the level of disinterest will return to the mid 90's levels when seats were easy to come by on game day. It would be an uphill battle, but it's still the NL Central and it's still quite possible this team could pull off another 85 win title next year. This isn't the NBA. You don't throw away seasons for a shot at one guy, and the Bulls failure to ever land a good free agent is only going to make it more difficult for the Cubs to justify passing on a quality guy because of the outside shot that they might have a chance to sign somebody who might be a little better a year later.

[dew1679666265]

If the Cubs can sign Dunn to a reasonable contract that leaves plenty of financial room to further better the team, then I think everyone would be happy.

 

As it stands, 1st base should be a high priority - and a key one. Waiting out and losing a bidding war for Gonzalez would not be good. I can see Prince Fielder going to an AL team, and I can also see some of the premier 1st basemen dragging it out.

 

If Dunn wants to be a Cub and can be signed for a nice deal, I'm happy. If the Cubs sign him to a 4 year deal for 50+ million per year and Hendry says that he signed him for a fair value - I think it's another idiotic contract.

 

I think we would all be much happier with Adrian Gonzalez because he is a better offensive and defensive baseball player. Defense does matter, and 1st base IS an important defensive position.

 

I'd absolutely be fine with Dunn on a reasonable contract and if he signs one with the Cubs, I'll be quite happy. With the weak FA class and the likelihood that his value around the league has increased with the move to first, I don't think it's likely, though. Like I said before, though, Gonzalez isn't the only option in the 2012 class. Swisher may well become available and he'd be a good pickup as well, possibly as good as Dunn or close to it.

[lumafia]

That is your assumption. Your are also going to spend more and for longer term, and presumably be further removed from the recession, with more teams able to spend more money. Ideally I'd take Gonzalez, I just don't see any logic in passing on a guy who fits a need now and has every indication in being ready to sign with the Cubs to wait for a guy who may never even become a free agent a year later and with no indication that the Cubs are high on his list.

 

What's my assumption?

 

The logic in passing on Dunn is that I'm hesitant to give a four year, big money contract to a guy who will be 32 before we likely will be competitive again. I was a huge Dunn supporter 2 years ago when we signed Milton Bradley, but I don't know that potentially overpaying for Dunn now would make a lot of sense when there very possibly could be better options available a year later, when we'll actually (from my point of view) be competitive again.

 

Replacing Theriot with DeWitt and Lee with Dunn would go a long way to making us more competitive next year. If we add Dunn ($12 mil per), and the Cubs payroll stays where it is ($144 mil), that still gives us $27 mil to make improvement to the team. They will have room to make improvements.

[dew1679666265]

The assumption that you would get more years or production from Gonzalez.

 

We will get more years and production out of Gonzalez from 2012 on. He'll be 30 to start the 2012 season, while Dunn will be 32. It may be a bit of an assumption, but it's really likely I'm right about that.

 

I understand your reasoning, I just don't see the logic. You try and field the best team you can on April 1 every year, unless you are Pittsburgh. You don't hold back in hopes of maybe having a chance at somebody else a year later. This team is struggling to put butts in seats this year. They will be hit hard if they don't make a splash this offseason. And if they are also rans in 2011 the level of disinterest will return to the mid 90's levels when seats were easy to come by on game day. It would be an uphill battle, but it's still the NL Central and it's still quite possible this team could pull off another 85 win title next year. This isn't the NBA. You don't throw away seasons for a shot at one guy, and the Bulls failure to ever land a good free agent is only going to make it more difficult for the Cubs to justify passing on a quality guy because of the outside shot that they might have a chance to sign somebody who might be a little better a year later.

 

It's not that I don't want us to try to compete next year, it's that I don't think there's a smart, realistic way to put together a really good team. We could go throw money at Dunn and Cliff Lee, but both are probably going to get more than they should - especially Lee. There might be some trade possibilities and if Hendry can go get Billy Butler or somebody, that'd be better than any of the FA options this year or next. I don't see that as happening, though. I think there's too many question marks on this team to be able to work with this free agent market and put together a 90+ win team. I think we can get back into the 80-85 range without signing Dunn, however (sign Pena to a 1-year deal, for instance).

[dew1679666265]

Replacing Theriot with DeWitt and Lee with Dunn would go a long way to making us more competitive next year. If we add Dunn ($12 mil per), and the Cubs payroll stays where it is ($144 mil), that still gives us $27 mil to make improvement to the team. They will have room to make improvements.

 

I think we will see an improvement next year, but there has also been talk of dropping payroll for next year, maybe significantly. It's not even so much room to make improvements, however, as it is who do we target? Cliff Lee will probably be vastly more than I want to pay him (likely Halladay type money) and there's really just not that much else out there. Trades might change things a bit, however.

 

If the plan is to contend next year no matter what, then sign Dunn. If the plan is to determine a little better what we've got in some of these young players and be a little more clear on what holes we have and what the young players can give us, then go after a Carlos Pena or a AAAA upside guy (Kila) and dip into a likely stronger FA class in a year.

[SouthSideRyan]

That is your assumption. Your are also going to spend more and for longer term, and presumably be further removed from the recession, with more teams able to spend more money. Ideally I'd take Gonzalez, I just don't see any logic in passing on a guy who fits a need now and has every indication in being ready to sign with the Cubs to wait for a guy who may never even become a free agent a year later and with no indication that the Cubs are high on his list.

 

What's my assumption?

 

The logic in passing on Dunn is that I'm hesitant to give a four year, big money contract to a guy who will be 32 before we likely will be competitive again. I was a huge Dunn supporter 2 years ago when we signed Milton Bradley, but I don't know that potentially overpaying for Dunn now would make a lot of sense when there very possibly could be better options available a year later, when we'll actually (from my point of view) be competitive again.

 

Replacing Theriot with DeWitt and Lee with Dunn would go a long way to making us more competitive next year. If we add Dunn ($12 mil per), and the Cubs payroll stays where it is ($144 mil), that still gives us $27 mil to make improvement to the team. They will have room to make improvements.

 

Those #s can't be right. Are you figuring in raises due to existing contracts/arbitration?

[CubColtPacer]

That is your assumption. Your are also going to spend more and for longer term, and presumably be further removed from the recession, with more teams able to spend more money. Ideally I'd take Gonzalez, I just don't see any logic in passing on a guy who fits a need now and has every indication in being ready to sign with the Cubs to wait for a guy who may never even become a free agent a year later and with no indication that the Cubs are high on his list.

 

What's my assumption?

 

The logic in passing on Dunn is that I'm hesitant to give a four year, big money contract to a guy who will be 32 before we likely will be competitive again. I was a huge Dunn supporter 2 years ago when we signed Milton Bradley, but I don't know that potentially overpaying for Dunn now would make a lot of sense when there very possibly could be better options available a year later, when we'll actually (from my point of view) be competitive again.

 

Replacing Theriot with DeWitt and Lee with Dunn would go a long way to making us more competitive next year. If we add Dunn ($12 mil per), and the Cubs payroll stays where it is ($144 mil), that still gives us $27 mil to make improvement to the team. They will have room to make improvements.

 

Those #s can't be right. Are you figuring in raises due to existing contracts/arbitration?

 

It's somewhat close. The Cubs are at 103.525 million next year according to Cots. That number is actually a little high because Cots automatically prorates all signing bonuses and when you look at how the Cubs stagger the contract it's pretty clear that they intend for that money to count for year 1. That would knock 5.25 more million off (1 million for Soriano, Zambrano, Fukudome and Dempster, and 1.25 million for Silva). So that brings the Cubs down to 98.275.

 

Marmol, Baker, Marshall, Guzman, Gorzelanny, Hill, and Soto are in arbitration next year. I have no idea what to project here... maybe 10 to 13 million in raises for this group? I'm estimating that Marmol, Gorzelanny, and Soto get raises between 2.5 and 4 million extra from what they made this year. Marshall goes up about a million, and the others might get cut for cheaper players but won't have significant raises otherwise. These estimations are rather uniformed though.

 

So that puts the Cubs at somewhere between 108 and change and 111 and change. Opening Day payroll this year was 144 and change so they have somewhere between 33 and 36 million to work with. So Dunn signing for 12 would leave 21 to 24 million left with those arbitration assumptions.

[SouthSideRyan]

You're adding the 10-13M in raises to the base payroll, but not the dollar amount they're getting raises from. (Marmol for example you're only counting as 2.5-4M, as opposed to 4.6-6.1M) That accounts for at least another 5M Then you have the minimum salary guys which are going to add at least 2M more. That puts you at 115-120M before adding anyone.

[CubColtPacer]

You're adding the 10-13M in raises to the base payroll, but not the dollar amount they're getting raises from. (Marmol for example you're only counting as 2.5-4M, as opposed to 4.6-6.1M) That accounts for at least another 5M Then you have the minimum salary guys which are going to add at least 2M more. That puts you at 115-120M before adding anyone.

 

Thank you. I knew there was a fundamental error somewhere but couldn't figure out where it was. It looks like they'll have room for one major move and some minor moves unless they free up some of the money on the roster (of which they are almost certain to do this offseason by dumping Fukudome and possibly Z)

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd imagine it's 1B, bullpen and bench. Which I guess is ok as far as where to focus, but I'm pretty damn scared of what type of contracts are going to be spent on guys to pitch 60 innings.

[Abe Frohman]

I don't see the logic in signing Dunn for 12 million per year, or giving him over 3 years. I have a hard time seeing 1st basemen - especially not one that is clearly in the top 3 of the class - as choosers. Adam Dunn should be able to be had for less than 10 million per year. If not, I would rather throw a contract at Gonzalez and take your chances with Colvin at 1st and focus on strengthening the team elsewhere.

[Abe Frohman]

I thought Adrian Gonzalez was a free agent - but he has a club option for 2011 ($5.5 million).

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see the logic in signing Dunn for 12 million per year, or giving him over 3 years. I have a hard time seeing 1st basemen - especially not one that is clearly in the top 3 of the class - as choosers. Adam Dunn should be able to be had for less than 10 million per year. If not, I would rather throw a contract at Gonzalez and take your chances with Colvin at 1st and focus on strengthening the team elsewhere.

 

Where are you going to strengthen the team? Colvin is very likely to be a huge disappointment offensively as a 1B. 1B is the most glaring need.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

I think Ramirez opting out will change the plans of this team significantly. I think 1B should be easy to upgrade whether it is Dunn or possibly Pena, however if the Cubs are looking to cut payroll and have to add players at both corners they will have a very tough time doing that.

 

If Ramirez stays I would almost assume signing Pena to a 1yr deal to keep the possibility open of going after Agon, Pujols, Fielder type players in 2012. With money possibly saved from Dunn you could then make an attempt at Cliff Lee. I also would not be surprised if Zambrano is dealt, and if he is I would target Beltran in return leaving Colvin as 4th OF. Give you a potential huge but also potentially disappointing middle of lineup with Ramirez, Pena, Beltran, Soriano.

 

DeWitt and Castro are already proving to be upgrades to what we started the season at.

[Abe Frohman]

 

Where are you going to strengthen the team? Colvin is very likely to be a huge disappointment offensively as a 1B. 1B is the most glaring need.

 

I understand that and agree, I am just trying to stress that I really hope that the Cubs have bigger plans than Dunn at 1st base.

 

I think that Colvin has always shown that he is going to be a low OB% hitter. I expect that at best he will be a .275/.315 ob type hitter, which unfortunately was an upgrade/nice combo with Fukudome.

 

Obviously, the bullpen needs a little strength. Maybe bring Woody back. How much worse could he be, and he would help a lot in the clubhouse. JJ Putz wouldn't hurt.

 

Starting pitching could use a boost. I would be happy if they could get Lilly back and perhaps Bronson Arroyo (unless the Reds exercise their $11 million club option - which is likely).

Edited August 26, 2010 by Abe Frohman

[Outshined_One]

I don't see the logic in signing Dunn for 12 million per year, or giving him over 3 years. I have a hard time seeing 1st basemen - especially not one that is clearly in the top 3 of the class - as choosers. Adam Dunn should be able to be had for less than 10 million per year. If not, I would rather throw a contract at Gonzalez and take your chances with Colvin at 1st and focus on strengthening the team elsewhere.

 

There's a potential issue with the line of thinking that moving Colvin to 1B could work for this team. Namely, it's offensive production...

 

Link

 

MLB RFs in 2010: .270/.342/.444/.785

MLB 1Bs in 2010: .268/.353/.457/.810

 

Colvin sports a .255/.314/.513/.827 line. Given the choice between moving him to 1B and finding a replacement in RF (Keep Fukudome/Nady as a platoon? Sign or trade for a random FA?) and keeping Colvin in RF while finding a replacement 1B, there's a better chance of upgrading this team offensively in trying to find a replacement 1B, even if it's just an "average" bat. That bat will likely be close to Colvin's production this year, given the averages.

 

Although, there might be something to be said for a Nady/Fukudome platoon if Nady's finally healthy and his production in the second half is for real. Hm...

[Abe Frohman]

It's just a damn shame that the Cubs have two horrible contracts in the outfield. Carl Crawford would be a great addition.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

I expect that at best he will be a .275/.315 ob type hitter, which unfortunately was an upgrade/nice combo with Fukudome.

 

How so?

[Sammy Sofa]

With the ways the Cubs are likely to be constructed based on the 1B they get after either this season or the next, they are [expletive] regardless who that 1B is if his offense falters, better defense or not.

 

Wouldn't it make sense, then, to pursue the guy who's going to be the most productive once we get competitive? Dunn will be 32 in 2012, which is probably the next time we'll be competitive, while Gonzalez will be 30 that year. We might get 1-2 seasons of production from Dunn once we get competitive again, compared to 3-4 out of Gonzalez.

 

The Cubs can pretty easily be competitive next year. Dunn would go a long way to making that so. He's also going to cost a lot less in years and money.

[XZero771679666304]

With the ways the Cubs are likely to be constructed based on the 1B they get after either this season or the next, they are [expletive] regardless who that 1B is if his offense falters, better defense or not.

 

Wouldn't it make sense, then, to pursue the guy who's going to be the most productive once we get competitive? Dunn will be 32 in 2012, which is probably the next time we'll be competitive, while Gonzalez will be 30 that year. We might get 1-2 seasons of production from Dunn once we get competitive again, compared to 3-4 out of Gonzalez.

 

The Cubs can pretty easily be competitive next year. Dunn would go a long way to making that so. He's also going to cost a lot less in years and money.

 

Yeah, just writing off 2011 is a bit much. If the Cubs get a typical ARam season, something close to what we've seen out of Soto, Castro, DeWitt and Byrd along with adding a typical Dunn season, that's a pretty good offense.

[dew1679666265]

The Cubs can pretty easily be competitive next year. Dunn would go a long way to making that so. He's also going to cost a lot less in years and money.

 

One thing that could change my mind would be hearing what the budget will be after the year. If Ricketts dramatically decreases the budget, then affording the $20 or so million Gonzalez wants will be incredibly difficult, if possible. Then a player like Dunn might be the best we can afford and still be able to plug some other holes.

 

My biggest concern with Dunn is that he'll end up getting upwards of $14-15 million a year and, at that point, not be worth the contract and possible a burdensome contract his last couple of years. If he gets less than that, then I'll agree that we should go with the certainty over Gonzalez.

[17 Seconds]

I can see it now-

 

Hendry hires Sandberg. Sandberg then informs Hendry that Dunn isn't "his type of player". Cubs pass on Dunn.